Simplicity and The Theory of Everything

Posted Jan. 14, 2013 by capt_infinity in Open

No comments yet



Is existence simple? Nothing profound, a simple reason for all there is? It certainly looks complex and deceives us until we gain the knowledge to understand what we witness. How many centuries did our species believe the sun revolved around us and the ground we stood on was flat?

Our knowledge changes when a person of wisdom starts to look and think about things differently. The list of people who have done so is tiny when compared to all of us who have lived on this planet which is the topic for another discussion. Einstein looked up at a clock tower and thought about time in a different way. His knowledge and training gave him the tools to pursue the thought and he changed the world of physics but it wasn't his knowledge and abilities that led to laws of physics as we understand them today, it was seeing that clock in an entirely different way. He died believing there was a simplified theory that tied theoretical physics to the world of quantum physics which he discovered. He never found the equivalent of that clock tower that would have led him to the theory of everything or did he? Could it be the answer was right there in his own equation? The speed of light squared represents a lot of energy stored in a particle of mass but it also represents a very short period of time.

My hypothesis is time has to be the factor but how? Let's assume there is no past except in archival form and there is no future. All there is, is the present and that state is the same at every point in the universe. Distance is a factor of space. We measure it in time but time is relative.

There is no future but the future becomes the present very quickly. How quickly and more importantly why? The universe expanded into existence quickly. Could the inverse be true? Could it cease to exist just as quickly? The answer is yes if time stops so what keeps it all going? Why am I asking so many questions? This one I can answer. I simply don't have the math skills to answer them all.

So here I am looking up at that clock tower and I am too damn old to pursue the education I need to gain the math skills I need to develop my theory so all I can do is share my hypothesis which is time has at least two states. It is the relationship between the two states that connects general relativity to quantum mechanics. These two states are, for lack of a better word, not in phase. Let's call them non-congruent. The difference between the two states results in the potential for the future. It predicts the future with basically total accuracy the closer the two states approach an in phase condition. As time is warped so is space and an effect similar to the Alcubierre drive relocates the affected mass at a new location in the same present. There can be no paradox.

Maybe an easier way to say this is time is not a dimension, it is a force. That probably isn't true but it has some of the properties of a force. Dark matter may be nothing more than matter that is out of phase. It doesn't take a lot for us not to be able to see it though we can see the affect of it.

This is about as deep into this as I can go. It is an observation. I present it in more detail in my blog. If you read my entire blog you will see the mental process that brought me to this hypothesis (http://indigo-energy.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html). I share my thoughts with those of you that possess the math skills I don't. Quite possibly there is something I am overlooking. If not I hope they inspire someone with the math skills to follow my line of reasoning. All I ask is credit for thinking it all up and the opportunity to work in any project that results.


Stay in touch with IONS